Matt's Monday Movie Musings: The "Megalopolis" box office is the only normal thing about it
Who really expected Francis Ford Coppola's passion project to make money? And in better news, "The Wild Robot" shows not every kids movie needs to be a brand. (Sorry, "Transformers One.")
Every Monday (or Tuesday), Matt attempts to make the start of the week at least a little more tolerable by wrapping up the biggest news at the weekend box office as well as other notable news out of showbiz … plus whatever other weird things he’s been watching and noticing. Enjoy!
Welcome back – not only another post but to PLAYOFF BASEBALL SEASON! Truly the most wonderful time of the year (mainly because Hallmark aren’t nearly as involved). And in case it seemed like it couldn’t get any better, word came down that the MLB is working on those awful uniforms that everyone hated and sweat through and looked like shockingly chintzy garbage, with a return to (uni)form coming … in 2026. Well that’s just great.
Anyways, speaking of shockingly chintzy garbage …
Everyone’s being mega-annoying about “Megalopolis”
Could everyone be the opposite of “Megalopolis” and be normal for five whole minutes?
Listen, I’m one of those people who doesn’t particularly like Francis Ford Coppola’s passion project – who thinks that, as happy as I am that a living film legend got to make the film living in his head for so long, in this personality-less era of cinema no less, it looks alarmingly cheap, is barely coherent, and mostly bores for two hours and 18 minutes. But apparently, for half of Film Twitter, that means that I’m a dumb baby bird who needs my films chewed up for me, that I must only want brand slop because I don’t appreciate a movie where a character disappears for 90 minutes only to be revealed in a flashback that, oh by the way, he died at some point. It’s so funny when people crave divisive movies that create conversation and debate, then seem so aghast and irritated when a polarizing film isn’t universally adored. (See also the “Everything Everywhere All At Once” wars.)
Then the movie flopped this weekend, making just more than $4 million on a $120 million self-financed budget – and the OTHER half of Film Twitter was annoying, dancing on the film’s grave and all-too-eager to throw its funeral. (Even the Toronto International Film Festival was eager to dunk on Coppola.) And why? Because he had the GALL to make HIS movie? Doesn’t he know making movies is about making OUR dreams come true, not his own? There’s a viciousness that people and industry folks seem to really pour on flawed original films (stuff like this or “Jupiter Ascending” or “Babylon” and other big swings). A middling Marvel movie can get a comfortable pass – see “Thor: Love and Thunder” sitting at a 63% on Rotten Tomatoes – for not upsetting anyone. But if it’s an odd original movie, it’s like the creators need to be put in their place for being so ARROGANT for thinking their new personal ideas were better than what we already know. I didn’t like the movie, but I’m glad it exists and glad what it represents – but nuance does no one any good on a social media platform where the most hyperbolic and heated takes get the most oxygen.
It’s silly to dunk on “Megalopolis” for flopping, too, when OF COURSE IT FLOPPED! No matter how optimistic they might’ve been, Francis Ford Coppola didn’t make the movie to make Marvel money, and Lionsgate – after the reception it received at industry screenings and Cannes – didn’t purchase the movie thinking it had a hit on its hands. There’s a reason why things were awkwardly silent on the sales front after its festival debut. Even if it came out in more inviting times for original and independent cinema, “Megalopolis” was going to be a tough sell. (And it’s not like Lionsgate did its best work with that.)
And even putting aside the film itself, it’s a new movie from a director whose last major movie came out in 1997 (“The Rainmaker”) and whose last remotely normal theatrical release was more than a decade ago (“Twixt”). Compared to other more conventional Adam Driver-led passion projects from movie giants, “Megalopolis” – a film featuring a live-action fourth wall break in some locations and whose grand conclusion involves Jon Voight giggling about his erection before shooting people with a bow and arrow – is on pace to make more than fellow cinema great Martin Scorsese’s “Silence” (just $7 million in 2016) and made more its opening weekend than Michael Mann’s “Ferrari” ($3 million over last Christmas). It did what anyone could’ve expected from an odd, idiosyncratic, experimental drama about architectural ambition and virginal pop stars – maybe even more.
And yes, it cost a lot for Coppola to make ($120 million of his own money, whereas Lionsgate’s deal sounds like it was around $100 million less), but sometimes you don’t spend money thinking you’ll see it back. Sometimes you spend it on something that means something to you and you believe in, to make a dream project real while you still can. (In some of its more cogent moments, “Megalopolis” makes that exact point.) You would think a place nicknamed “The Dream Factory” would remember that.
Wild indeed! “The Wild Robot” is a winner
In more positive news for original movies, “The Wild Robot” landed up at the top of the weekend box office with a healthy $35 million – with likely much more to come considering the glowing reviews, the happy audience response and the release schedule not dishing out another notable kids movie until “Wicked” and “Moana 2” around Thanksgiving.
OK, so “The Wild Robot” isn’t technically an original movie – it’s based on an apparently fairly popular book series – but by today’s standards for originality, it’s pretty fresh to most audiences. So the fact that it performed so well is heartening, particularly in this climate where most kids movies (like most studio movies) need to be either sequels or attached to a brand of some kind to find success. DreamWorks knows this all too well; their last original movie, 2023’s “Ruby Gillman Teenage Kraken,” made just $15 million – less than the fourth “Expendables” movie you forgot existed and something called “The Blind.” Most other original animated features since the pandemic were flops (“Wish,” “Strange World,” “Ron’s Gone Wrong,” “Raya and the Last Dragon”), and the ones that weren’t (“Elemental,” “Migration”) needed remarkable legs to avoid that fate … or weren’t even given the chance, shunted to streaming in the case of “Turning Red,” “Luca” and “The Mitchells vs. the Machines.”
When I first saw the mostly wordless teaser for “Wild Robot” earlier this year, I thought it looked lovely and wonderful … and doomed, just not the kind of quippy, familiar object that makes money now. (And I even remember the days when Pixar had a panic attack trying to get people into their own robot movie “Wall-E,” desperately selling the movie originally on all of Pixar’s OTHER movies. And that was far friendly times for original films.) I’m thrilled to be wrong, and hopefully not just for one weekend.
“The Substance” still has box office substance
$7 million may be just a rounding error for the likes of Disney and not even enough to pass a thing called “Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot” – but for a small independent studio (MUBI) selling a very bloody, very gross, very R-rated body horror film, that’s a fairly massive win.
The giddily nasty body image satire only dropped 36% this past weekend and added another $2 million to its tally, telling me people are still checking this acquired taste out. And for reference, “The Substance’s” $7 million haul is already more than every other MUBI domestic theatrical release combined. I’ve complained online before only about how A24’s younger-skewing hip cinephile fandom often unfortunately doesn’t venture beyond just the one indie studio (despite other indies making just as interesting, idiosyncratic projects), but this seems to inspire hope that audiences growingly see A24 doesn’t have an exclusive license on cool weird genre movies worth seeing big.
Finally, a high-concept indie horror movie that’s worthy of buzz!
With “Late Night with the Devil” and “In a Violent Nature,” it’s been a big year for buzzy high-concept indie horror movies breaking out. And with “Late Night with the Devil” and “In a Violent Nature,” it’s also been a big year for buzzy high-concept indie horror movies disappointing me. Both movies have their merits … but both movies also bail on their enticing concepts like COWARDS. (My apologies, “In a Violent Nature,” please don’t yoga kill me.)
Weirdly enough, the one that actually works for me – and actually commits to its bit – is the one with the least amount of hubbub around it: “Azrael,” which quietly showed up in theaters this past weekend and which quietly impressed me quite a bit. The horror flick drops you right into the story of a woman (horror fave Samara Weaving) fleeing from a weird religious cult with a habit of feeding … something … in the woods. Oh, and also no one speaks the entire movie. Save for a brief character speaking a foreign language, “Azrael” is wordless, taking place in a post-rapture world where the lone survivors have given up their “sin” of speech. And unlike its buzzier brethren that had crummy modern “behind-the-scenes doc footage” or left the serial killer’s perspective to spin around with teens, it sticks to its shtick – sometimes to its detriment but mostly to immersive, thrilling ends.
So if you’re looking for an entertainingly tense and gnarly spooky season pick, check out “Azrael” – sneakily the best of the buzzy bunch for me this year.
Hey, remember “Wolfs”?
Everyone’s got “Wolfs” fever, right? No? You totally forgot this movie existed?
Man, great work, Apple – it takes some doing to make a movie starring George Clooney and Brad Pitt, directed by the guy behind the last three “Spider-Man” entries, disappear entirely from the public consciousness, but you pulled it off. The dueling fixers dark dramedy was supposed to come out wide theatrically this month, but Apple – scared off by the flops of “Argylle” and “Fly Me To the Moon” – bailed on theaters (and making money), instead giving it a pity limited release in theaters to essentially preview its streaming debut. The result? A movie that doesn’t exist. I’m sure Apple will report some VERY RELIABLE numbers that AcTuAlLy “Wolfs” is the most successful streaming movie release in the streamer’s history and maybe world history, but we’ll all know that’s BS considering there’s a deathly vacuum where the buzz and discussion around this movie is supposed to be.
It’s annoying enough that I believe it would’ve been a box office base hit, maybe just a single and not enough to balance its ridiculous reported $200 million budget but still: MONEY! (Anecdotal evidence: I went to a screening during a Packers Sunday in Wisconsin that was full of adults happy to see a movie made for them on the big screen.) It’s even MORE annoying that Apple’s taking its ball and going home considering, before “Argylle” and “Fly Me to the Moon,” it was actually doing theatrical … pretty well! “Killers of the Flower Moon” – a three-hour bummer about America’s sins – made more money domestic than “Cocaine Bear,” the “Paw Patrol” sequel and multiple big-budget, four-quadrant super hero movies. The same goes for “Napoleon,” which made more money worldwide than “The Marvels,” “Scream VI” and the animated “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.” They were getting people to the movies – and for movies otherwise struggling to succeed, at that.
And sure, “Argylle” and “Fly Me to the Moon” didn’t work – but across the board, Apple’s problem wasn’t theatrical. Their problem was spending too much. “KOTFM” and “Napoleon” were both $200 million endeavors unlikely to see that back, “Argylle” cost $200 million to acquire (its actual production cost significantly less) and “Fly Me to the Moon” was a rom-com that somehow cost $100 million. They were making money in theaters – they just weren’t making enough to offset their terrible spending habits. So instead of just fixing the latter, they’re bailing and pivoting to streaming, trying to will 2020’s streaming bubble boom into existence. It’s the dumbest thing since they removed the headphone jack from all their products.
I want “Nobody Wants This” to be approximately six hours shorter
My wife and I started “Nobody Wants This” this past weekend, and I’ve had some mean words for the rom-com – but it was cute! About an hour in, I was entertained; the cast was charming, and Greg Mottola (“Superbad,” the woefully underseen “Confess, Fletch”) is a pro behind the helm, delivering warm swoons and comedic zip. Just one problem: There’s four more whole hours to go! I don’t need FIVE HOURS of “will they/won’t they” from this rom-com story. The saga of “will a rabbi and podcaster fall in love” does not need to be longer than “Killers of the Flower Moon.” Maybe I’d finish it if the finish line was in sight, but instead I’m going back to “The Great British Baking Show.” Bring back rom-com movies please; I only have so much time left.
Oh, and on the topic of “The Great British Baking Show” and annoying streaming things: Why doesn’t Netflix tell people one of their most beloved shows is back? I don’t know; if I had a new season of a popular program, I would alert people to this development – but instead, the baking show was not even included on the Big Red Streaming Monolith’s monthly arrivals-and-departures list and, on its opening weekend, it was buried on the website. Annoying that THIS is the company Hollywood is ruining itself to replicate.
Anyways, the show is still cute and charming and hunger-inducing – though this season does include an American expat, so it may be doomed. Bringing an over-competitive American into the recipe? Why not have another Mexican Week and bring back Matt Lucas while you’re at it.
Maybe don’t second-guess the “Nosferatu” marketing
Robert Eggers’ big Christmas “Nosferatu” remake released another trailer this week, and it looks good – I’m in! But apparently SOME are unsatisfied, at least judging by this AV Club headline.
I don’t know, if only there were several other “Nosferatu” movies that existed that could give you an idea of what the vampire will look like. If only. But also: Huh, I wonder if some other atmospheric horror movie came out this year and found WILD success at the box office mostly thanks to an ad campaign that hid its strange titular villain from audiences, building tension and anticipation. Maybe it was about a guy with legs of a particular length? Couldn’t be sure. Anyways, they’re trying to get a vampire movie to finally succeed – at Christmas, no less. Maybe just let the marketing people cook on this one.
Honestly wonder if Megalopolis would have made less money if it weren’t such an obvious fiasco that some people just had to see it for themselves!
How dare you have a measured, rational take on Megalopolis.